Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Property Valuation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Owner contests assessor—igures for 5752 Promenade Square; board to decide next week
Summary
A builder and homeowner challenged the assessor bout the valuation of a Memorial-area home at 5752 Promenade Square, presenting appraisals and sale comparables while assessor staff defended the office—s square-foot adjustments and data choices; the Board of Equalization will decide next Friday.
A builder who identified herself as Whitney told the Oklahoma County Board of Equalization on May 6 that appraisals and neighborhood sales do not support the assessor—s current valuation for the house at 5752 Promenade Square.
Whitney said she had two appraisals during construction and after completion and that she added a pool after the earlier appraisal; she described an initial bank appraisal during construction in 2023 and a later permanent-financing appraisal dated March 20, which she said showed a higher finished value. She told the board she paid about $2.36 for the lot in 2023, said comparable sales in 2024 showed prices in the $300s per square foot range, and called the assessor—s assessed per-square-foot figure unusually high for the neighborhood.
An assessor representative said the assessor—s office adjusted the property—s square footage (removing an erroneous hot tub entry) and used sales from 2024 and earlier for its comparable-sales analysis. The assessor—s staff said two of the appraisal—s comps either were 2025 sales or never sold and therefore could not be used; staff reported the six-comp set it relied on had a median of about $2.19 million and a mean of about $2.13 million, which the staff said supported the office—s valuation approach. The assessor—s presenter explained that adjustments for square footage were the largest single factor, saying the office applies a roughly 16.87% adjustment for differences in size on affected comparables.
Whitney pressed staff on whether nearby villa lots and the mix of higher- and lower-end villa pockets within the development had been treated consistently. The assessor—s staff said they used the appraisal where possible and supplemented it with neighborhood sales, but that the county cannot use 2025 sales as comparables for 2024 valuations.
No final decision was made at the May 6 hearing. The chair said the board will meet again next Friday to consider the evidence and issue a written decision by mail. Both parties were told the review is appellate in nature; the board will not accept new evidence that was not presented to the assessor unless the assessor agrees to consider it.
The record shows a contested factual dispute over which comparables and adjustments best reflect market value as of Dec. 31, 2024; the board will resolve those questions at its next meeting.
